4 - Sintha Wahjusaputri et al - Journal UNY

(1)

CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS IN IMPLEMENTING TEACHING FACTORY- BASED COMPETENCY FOR VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Sintha Wahjusaputri ¹ *, Bunyamin Bunyamin ¹, Tashia Indah Nastiti ²

1 Universitas Muhammadiyah Prof. Dr. HAMKA, Jakarta, Indonesia

2 Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia

Abstract: The teaching factory concept is the basis for a new model that attempts to integrate academic and industrial worlds. This study aims to identify and explore critical success factors in implementing the teaching factory model. Learning activities that are carried out in work environments are able to provide students with relevant learning experiences and develop teachers’ learning objectives which in turn will improve the overall quality of teaching and learning processes in which knowledge about industrial worlds is constructed. This research used qualitative and quantitative methods, adopting Kitch- enham’s approach to identify the critical success factors and using reliability and validity testing to validate the critical success factor items. This research was conducted in five vocational high schools in Central Java Province, with the respondents of 140 students. This research shows that there were 27 critical success factors of teaching factory implementation, three of which are the main factors: business and industrial worlds, schools and teachers, and students.

Keywords: competency, teaching factory, vocational education

FAKTOR KEBERHASILAN KRITIS IMPLEMENTASI KOMPETENSI BERBASIS TEACHING FACTORY UNTUK SISWA SMK

Abstrak: Konsep teaching factory adalah dasar untuk model baru integrasi antara dunia akademik dan industri. Studi ini bertujuan mengidentifikasi dan mengeksplorasi faktor-faktor keberhasilan penting yang terkait dengan penerapan model pembelajaran berbasis dunia industri. Belajar di lingkungan kerja akan menumbuhkan pengalaman belajar yang relevan dan dapat mengembangkan tujuan pengajaran guru untuk meningkatkan kegiatan belajar mengajar dengan pengetahuan berdasarkan standar industri.

Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif dan kuantitatif, yang merupakan pendekatan Kitcheham untuk mengidentifikasi faktor keberhasilan kritis dan pengujian realibility dan validitas untuk mem- validasi item faktor keberhasilan kritis. Penelitian ini dilakukan di lima SMK di Provinsi Jawa Tengah, dengan responden 140 siswa. Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ada 27 faktor keberhasilan kritis iple- mentasi teaching factory, dengan 3 faktor utama yaitu dunia bisnis dan industri, sekolah dan guru, serta siswa.

Kata Kunci: kompetensi, pendidikan kejuruan, teaching factory

INTRODUCTION

Indonesian President, Joko Widodo, con- firms that people in Indonesia is now facing major global challenges regarding to the 4.0 Industrial Revolution in the 21st century. It links to not only a competitive business environment, but also to a wider industrial revolution. To answer this, some prominent actions is preferable to take into ac- count, one of which is the implementation of teaching factory concept, an action-oriented learning approach referring to procedures and standards applied in industry and is carried out in an atmosphere like what happens in the industry (Reisinger et al., 2019). The big wave of the Industrial Revo- lution 4.0 has promoted tremendous tension,

terrible destructive technology, and turbulence in new life, which leads to increasing global competition (Prinz et al., 2016).

The stipulation of the Presidential Instruc- tion on vocational high schools revitalization aims to bring significant changes for vocational high schools in Indenesia to be better and more compe- tent. To win the competition, Indonesia has to prepare human resources, who have adequate qualifi- cation and basic competence in facing the global challenges. In addition to arapid infrastructure transformation in the past four years, improving human quality is an essential prerequisite to avoid Indonesia from an economic situation in which low-wage economies get stuck in the middle-in- come trap (an interview with the education expert

(2)

Cakrawala Pendidikan, Vol. 40, No. 3, October 2021 doi:10.21831/cp.v40i3.28877

staff of the Ministry of Education and Culture of Central Java Province, Mr. Sulistiono, July 2019).

Headed for the third year of the revitalization of vocational high schools, in accordance with the mandate of Presidential Instruction No. 9 year of 2016 concerning Vocational Education Revital- ization, several positive achievements have been gradually appeared. In line with the increasing number of vocational high school graduate work- ers in 2018, the vulnerable unemployment rate of vocational high school graduates has decreased each year (an interview with the education expert staff of the Ministry of Education and Culture of Central Java Province, Mr. Sulistiono, July 2019).

The adjustment of Curriculum and Industrial Co- operation to develop vocational education has related to the competencies of the needs of graduate users (link and match). Thus the Ministry of Edu- cation and Culture made some adjustments imple- mented in vocational education curriculum. While previous curriculum used a supply-driven approach, recently, the new curriculum has been ad- justed to be demand-driven.

The business and industrial worlds are actively involved in the vocational education process at the school level. Recently, vocational high school is running a curriculum which considers the demands of the business and industry world.

Besides, the curriculum is developed collabora- tively with business and industrial sectors.

Equally, the business and industrial manufacturing take parts to govern the curriculum by 70 per- cent (Wahjusaputri & Siregar, 2017).

In the industrial learning, the theory contributes to the ongoing subjects. The students’

problems in the industry are the starting point of training activities in industrial learning. Product- oriented learning theory is exemplified in this contribution from each vocational training course oc- cupied by students theoretically and practically.

Consequently, the problems which appeared from the students and infrastructure become a starting point for the learning processes and students’

competencies development (Dimitris Mavrikios et al., 2018).

Teaching factory is a concept of production or service-based learning in a vocational high school which refers to the standards and procedures applied in the industry and is carried out in an industrial atmosphere. The industrial class aims at transferring what happens in industrial environment activities to the courses in class (Rentzos et al., 2014).

The concept of a teaching factory is production-based learning integrated with classroom

learning and a practical environment to foster ac- curate and relevant work and learning experiences according to the business and industrial needs. The teaching factory concept is the basis of a new integration model between academic and industrial sectors. The first lessons are "factory-to classroom" and "academia-to industry".

The concept of a teaching factory aims to transfer the work environment to the classroom.

Learning through the work environment will provide relevant learning experiences for students and develop teachers' teaching objectives to improve teaching experiences based on industry standards.

The concept of teaching factory is created because of three things: (1) Conventional learning is not enough; (2) Students get benefits from hands-on practical experience; and (3) Team-based learning experiences involve students, staff instructors, and industry participation which enrich the educational process and provide tangible benefits for all parties (Rentzos et al., 2014).

According to Tvenge et al. (2016), the teaching factory aims to obtain students' knowledge by creating a school curriculum that provides standard regulation according to industrial procedures. Further said by Sudhoff et al. (2020), the implementation of the teaching factory learning concept in the vocational high school’s environment develops relevant work experience in the form of a factory as a place of learning. This helps students to be able to evaluate their ability to improve their learning by using technology; one of the technologies carried out is the teaching factory training phase so that teaching is practiced in knowledge transfer. The first element involves an educational approach to learning and teaching.

The second element, "factory" describes the industrial environment needed for vocational education related to the field of school studies (Brunoe et al., 2019).

The teaching factory model enhances indi- vidual reflection as a dimension in the cycle as a part of the learning processes. The purpose is to evaluate students' performance, which provides an understanding of the knowledge, skills, and atti- tudes obtained from learning in the industry. Eval- uation tools are essential in identifying areas to improve practice and optimize learning. Students are encouraged to explore emotions and questions, reflect, and provide feedback to their friends with another (Baena et al., 2017).

The learning factory is the key objective of the teaching factory model prepared to move towards assimilation and accommodation to transfer learning in the direction of the industrial

(3)

Critical success factors in implementing teaching … revolution 4.0 (Wafroturrohmah et al., 2020). The

students’ ability to develop production competence is a key requirement for industry-based learning (Stief et al., 2018). The industrial practi- tioners provide lessons and laboratory industrial- standard introduced to students in designing products and manufacturing, and they also give guidance and motivation to manufacture design products (Mourtzis & Vlachou, 2018).

In industrial learning, the latest advances in information and communication technology (ICT) must be included to improve school productivity and efficiency (Baena et al., 2017). According to Baena et al. (2017), the quality of industrial learning is determined from the level of education and the integrated technology. Firstly, the relevant subject matter must be determined according to future production needs. Students’ competencies are the the main goal of industrial learning. Indus- try learning aims to understand product modeling and model various products as a basis for develop- ing new product configurators.

Secondly, to structure product configurators that provide manufacturing costs or sales prices and offer data needed for manufacturing products, the students are equipped with literature and methods for creating certain products. Addi- tionally, students are given a short lecture by a teacher, outlining and modeling the concepts from the provided literature. After taking the related courses, the students are trained in the workshop/laboratory through discussion groups (Bru- noe et al., 2019).

In a study conducted by Stojkić and Bošnjak (2019), the level of education and techno- logical infrastructure must be aligned to complete the design of industrial learning. The industrial learning curriculum (Learning-Factory-Curricu- lum-Guide) must create a competency-oriented learning system in which relevant subject matter must be determined following the needs of the industry integrated into the school curriculum.

According to Reining et al. (2019), the industrial learning uses the process of learning a training approach in an industrial environment by adopting renewable industry knowledge and technology, so the students can create innovations in improving critical thinking skills while solving production problems. An innovative learning environment has a positive impact on students because the students’ ability to develop potential products is the main requirement for industrial- based learning (Stief et al., 2018).

Industry 4.0 influences both students and organizations (schools) with technical innovations

in production. It is said that industrial learning must have a learning/teaching component and a production component. To accommodate the learning process, the production component can be either in the form of virtual or physical and products/services (Abele et al., 2016).

METHODS

This research used a systematic literature review from Kitchenham to attain critical success factors from the teaching factory. After that, the critical success factor items were validated by using a questionnaire with reliability and validity analysis. The systematic literature review by Kitchenham aims to identify, evaluate, and inter- pret all research results which are relevant to the research questions (Wahjusaputri et al., 2019).

Based on these objectives, a systematic literature review has 3 main stages: identification, evaluation, and interpretation.

Researchers determined a research question at the identification stage, "What are the critical success factors of teaching factory implementation?". The relevant research results in several da- tabase locations had been based on some prior research questions found in ScienceDirect, Scopus, SINTA, and Springerlink. At the evaluation stage, researchers selected relevant research results based on defined exclusion and inclusion criteria.

Table 1. Exclusion and Inclusion Criteria

After evaluating the results of relevant research, critical success factor data related to the implementation of the teaching factory were ex- tracted. At the interpretation stage, researchers conducted data translation or critical success factor items, so that there would be no identical defi- nition among the items.

Critical success factor items obtained from the systematic literature review method were validated using questionnaires that were further analysed using validity and rehabilitation testing. The questionnaire was distributed to 140 vocational school students in Central Java Province. The data were analysed quantitatively along with descriptive analysis techniques. One of the functions of descriptive analysis is to present research data in a simple form and to portray an overview of research results. The qualitative data analysis

Exclusion Inclusion

Bias Literature Following the research question Incomplete Arti-

cle

Related to the successful implementation of the teaching factory

Not in English or Bahasa

(4)

technique was also conducted to understand the results of validation data (assessments) from ex- perts who had provided valuable information for the advancement and comprehensiveness of the teaching factory model.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Findings

Using the Kitchenham approach, this research discovered a list of critical success factors (CSF) in implementing the teaching factory model. Based on research questions, exclusion, and inclusion criteria, 10 relevant research results were used to determine the critical success factor of the teaching factory. Of the 10 relevant research results, the process of synthesis and data extraction was obtaineds so that 27 items of critical success factors were obtained. The 27 critical success factors can be seen in Table 2.

Critical success factor items were validated by reliability and validity testing in the form of questionnaires. This questionnaire was distributed to 140 students of Vocational High Schools in Central Java Province. The questionnaire filled by 140 students was calculated as the content validity coefficient for each critical success factor item.

Based on the significance of the content validity standard (V), for 140 students (appraisers) and five categories (Likert scale), the minimum value of content validity (V) of the significant coefficient is rcount > rtable. Testing the validity of a critical success factor item aims to measure whether the item is suitable for use (valid) or not. To determine the data validation, the correlation test of the significant coefficient was set at the signification level of 0.05. Data validation tests show that all critical success factor items were valid and can be used because rcount > rtable. In other words, the entire item had good content validity.

Table 2. Data Extraction Result

No. Item Critical Success Factor Article

1. Work experience from Business and Industrial World (Lugaresi et al., 2020; Prianto et al., 2020) 2. Training/seminars/ workshops from Business and Indus-

trial World

(Krúckhans et al., 2015; D. Mavrikios et al., 2013)

3. Training participation (Barton & Delbridge, 2006)

4. Develop entrepreneurship potential (McMullen & Shepherd, 2006; Yohana, 2020)

5. Understand the theory of teaching factory management (Karre et al., 2019; Wermann et al., 2019) 6. Understand the principles of teaching factory learning (Karre et al., 2019; Wermann et al., 2019) 7. Industrial work atmosphere in learning (Prinz et al., 2016; Wermann et al., 2019) 8. Technology in the industry in learning (Li et al., 2019; Wermann et al., 2019) 9.. Industrial work culture in learning (Wafroturrohmah et al., 2020)

10. Work ethics (Spillane et al., 2020)

11. High sense of responsibility in completing work (Prinz et al., 2016)

12. Self-confidence (Prinz et al., 2016)

13. Understand, obey, and teach social norms (Haris, 2017) 14. Good communication with Business and Industrial

World

(Schmidbauer et al., 2020) 15. Knowledge about the Business and Industrial World

standards

(Prinz et al., 2016) 16. Practical skills according to my subjects (Baena et al., 2017) 17. Guidance and tutor from the teachers (Syauqi et al., 2020) 18. Business and Industrial World contributions (Prinz et al., 2016) 19. Training for instructors provided by Business and Indus-

trial World

(Krúckhans et al., 2015) 20. Training for students provided by Business and Industrial

World

(Krúckhans et al., 2015) 21. Training for school managers provided by Business and

Industrial World

(Krúckhans et al., 2015)

22. HR/instructor facilities (Kuat, 2018)

23. Infrastructure facilities (Kuat, 2018)

24.. Learning resource facilities (Kuat, 2018)

25. Schools’ initiative to cooperate with Business and Indus- trial World

(Centea et al., 2019; Dimitris Mavrikios et al., 2018)

26. Collaborate with the various industrial world (Darun et al., 2019) 27. School maintain the production process (Sudhoff et al., 2020)

(5)

Critical success factors in implementing teaching … Next, the researcher calculated the homo-

geneity-reliability coefficient for each item of the success factor by using the given Aiken's H for- mula using SPSS. Based on significant homogeneity (H) reliability standards, the minimum significant coefficient of homogeneity reliability value (H is 0.51 (H> 0.51). Therefore, if the value of H<0.51, then the item would be eliminated.

Based on the results of reliability testing, it can be seen that all items were reliable so that there was no elimination to the items.

Discussion

In the earlier section, from previous research in this study obtained 27 items of critical success factors (Table 3). If observed more deeply, the critical success factor of the teaching factory con- sisted of 3 main factors: business, industrial world, and school and teacher. Students repre- sented in Figure 1 with these three elements could

determine the success of the implementation of the teaching factory.

The most influential factor in the success of the teaching factory is the synergy between the teaching factory and the world of business and industry. Learning through a teaching factory also aims to develop good characters and work ethics of discipline, responsibility, honesty, cooperation, and leadership that the industry needs. The absorption of alumni in the business and industrial worlds is one of the characteristics of teaching factory success. Therefore, teaching a factory curriculum must involve the business and the industrial worlds. Based on Figure 1, the factors that affect the success of teaching factors in the industry are the contribution of industry in improving student work experience, carrying out training/workshop/seminar for students, providing training for teachers and teaching factory instructors, and also providing training for school administrators.

Table 3. Critical Success Factors of Teaching Factory Implementation No. Item Critical Success Factor of a Teaching Factory V Coeffi-

cient

H Coeffi- cient Sig 1. Work experience from Business and Industrial World 0,691 0,917 0,000 2.. Trining/workshops/seminars from Business and Industrial World 0,626 0,918 0,000 3. Participated in the training held by Business and Industrial World 0,684 0,917 0,000

4. Develop entrepreneurship potential 0,520 0,920 0,000

5. Understand the theory of managing teaching factory learning 0,543 0,919 0,000 6. Understand the principles of teaching factory learning 0,623 0,918 0,000

7. Industrial work atmosphere in learning 0,555 0,919 0,000

8. Technology in the industry in learning 0,484 0,920 0,000

9.. Industrial work culture in learning 0,441 0,921 0,000

10. Work ethic 0,489 0,920 0,000

11. High sense of responsibility in completing work 0,438 0,921 0,000

12. Self-confidence 0,487 0,920 0,000

13. Understand, obey and teach social norms 0,491 0,920 0,000

14.. Good communication with Business and Industrial World 0,495 0,920 0,000 15. Knowledge about the subject matter provided according to Business

and Industrial World standards

0,456 0,920 0,000

16. Practical skills according to my subjects 0,251 0,923 0,000

17. Guidance and tutor from the teachers 0,532 0,919 0,000

18. Business and Industrial World contributions 0,633 0,918 0,000

19. Training for instructors provided by Business and Industrial World 0,610 0,918 0,000 20. Training for students provided by Business and Industrial World 0,570 0,919 0,000 21.. Training for school managers provided by Business and Industrial

World

0,396 0,922 0,000

22. HR/instructor facilities 0,585 0,919 0,000

23. Infrastructure facilities 0,520 0,920 0,000

24. Learning resource facilities 0,501 0,920 0,000

25. Schools actively offer cooperation with Business and Industrial World

0,457 0,920 0,000

26. Having collaboration involving more than 1 Business and Indus- trial World

0,388 0,921 0,000

27. The production process is carried out at school 0,523 0,919 0,000

(6)

Figure 1. Three Main Factors of Teaching Factory Implementation’s Critical Success Factor The second main factor that influences the

successful implementation of teaching factories is schools and teachers. Improving the quality of learning outcomes is not just to equip competence (competency-based training) but towards learning that equips the ability to produce goods/services (production-based training). The products can be used as a vehicle for the development of creative technopreneurs to build an industrial culture in schools. Therefore, the readiness of school infrastructure facilities in implementing teaching factory learning is a must. In addition, the competency standards used by

schools in the implementation of teaching factories are competencies needed in the industrial world. This is expected to prepare students to face the demands of the needs of the industrial world.

In addition, schools must prepare facilities and competency standards. Teachers are also re- quired to improve their competency while transferring the knowledge needed by students. Fi- nally, teachers are those who have academic qualifications and industrial work experience. By saying this, the teachers are expected to transform knowledge while supervising the process to present "finished products on time".

(7)

Critical success factors in implementing teaching … Learning media used in the teaching factory

process uses production work as a medium for the learning process. Production work can be industrial order or standard products. The instructor must first understand this product as a medium for competency development through product function, dimensions, tolerance, and completion time.

The Department's Production Unit can be the place at which production from teaching factories can be directly distributed to the community. In addition to partner industry, the products can be managed by the Production Unit to stimu- late technopreneurs skills for vocational learners.

The third main factor that determines the success of the implementation of the teaching factory is the students. Students with a good quality in both academic and potential skills have an opportunity to enter the teaching factory pro- gram. In addition to skills and academics, students must also have a high sense of responsibility and work ethics in implementing learning and training from schools and the industrial world.

CONCLUSION

The systematic review method with Kitch- enham approach identified various studies related to the implementation of teaching factories. The data were synthesized to obtain 27 critical success factor items tested using rehabilitation and validity testing. In practical terms, the overall items produced can help schools evaluate and improve the quality of teaching factory implementation. This research contributes to the Kitchen- ham approach that was successfully demon- strated in the implementation of teaching factories. Other researchers in similar research activities can adopt methodologies and stages that researchers have done.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to express our gratitude to the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology for supporting this research funding.

We would also like to thank the Universitas Mu- hammadiyah Prof. DR. HAMKA for supporting this research and vocational schools in Central Java Province, Indonesia.

REFERENCES

Abele, E., Bauerdick, C. J. H., Strobel, N., &

Panten, N. (2016). ETA learning factory:

A holistic concept for teaching energy efficiency in production. Procedia CIRP, 54(Section 3), 83–88.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.06.0

51

Baena, F., Guarin, A., Mora, J., Sauza, J., &

Retat, S. (2017). Learning factory: The path to industry 4.0. Procedia

Manufacturing, 9, 73–80.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.04.

022

Barton, H., & Delbridge, R. (2006). Delivering the “learning factory”?: Evidence on hr roles in contemporary manufacturing.

Journal of European Industrial Training, 30, 385–395.

Brunoe, T. D., Mortensen, S. T., Andersen, A.- L., & Nielsen, K. (2019). Learning factory with product configurator for teaching product family modelling and systems integration. Procedia

012

Centea, D., Singh, I., & Elbestawi, M. (2019).

SEPT approaches for education and training using a learning factory. Procedia Manufacturing, 31, 109–115.

018

Darun, M. R., Palm, D., Athinarayanan, R., Hummel, V., & Von Leipzig, K. (2019).

The learning factory–a new stimulus to enhance international collaboration.

Procedia Manufacturing, 31, 290–295.

046

Haris, A. (2017). Learning system management based on teaching factory in Indonesia.

Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(4), 237–248.

https://doi.org/10.26500/jarssh-02-2017- 0402

Karre, H., Hammer, M., & Ramsauer, C. (2019).

Building capabilities for agility in a learning factory setting. Procedia Manufacturing, 31, 60–65.

010

Krúckhans, B., Wienbruch, T., Freith, S., Oberc, H., Kreimeier, D., & Kuhlenkötter, B.

(2015). Learning factories and their enhancements-A comprehensive training concept to increase resource efficiency.

Procedia CIRP, 32(Clf), 47–52.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.02.2 24

(8)

Kuat, T. (2018). Implementation of edupreneurship through the teaching factory in vocational high school of hotel accommodation: Case study at SMK N 6 Yogyakarta. Journal of Vocational Education Studies, 1(1), 7–12.

https://doi.org/10.12928/joves.v1i1.590 Li, F., Yang, J., Wang, J., Li, S., & Zheng, L.

(2019). Integration of digitization trends in learning factories. Procedia

054

Lugaresi, G., Frigerio, N., & Matta, A. (2020).

A new learning factory experience exploiting LEGO for teaching manufacturing systems integration.

106

Mavrikios, D., Papakostas, N., Mourtzis, D., &

Chryssolouris, G. (2013). On industrial learning and training for the factories of the future: A conceptual, cognitive and technology framework. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 24(3), 473–

485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-011- 0590-9

Mavrikios, Dimitris, Georgoulias, K., &

Chryssolouris, G. (2018). The teaching factory paradigm: Developments and outlook. Procedia Manufacturing, 23(2017), 1–6.

029

McMullen, J. S., & Shepherd, D. A. (2006).

Entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in the theory of the

entrepreneur. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 132–152.

https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2006.19379 628

Mourtzis, D., & Vlachou, E. (2018). Augmented reality supported product design towards industry 4.0: A teaching factory

paradigm. 8th CIRP Sponsored

Conference on Learning Factories (CLF 2018), 23, 207–212.

018

Prianto, A., Winardi, W., & Qomariyah, U. N.

(2020). The effect of the implementation of teaching factory and its learning

involvement toward work readiness of vocational school graduates. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 283–302.

https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14117a Prinz, C., Morlock, F., Freith, S., Kreggenfeld,

N., Kreimeier, D., & Kuhlenkötter, B.

(2016). Learning factory modules for smart factories in industrie 4.0. Procedia CIRP, 54, 113–118.

Reining, N., Kauffeld, S., & Herrmann, C.

(2019). Students’ interactions: Using video data as a mean to identify competences addressed in learning factories. Procedia Manufacturing, 31, 1–

7.

001

Reisinger, G., Trautner, T., Hennig, M., Alexandra, G. R., Mazak, T., Hold, P., Gerhard, D., & Mazak, A. (2019). TU Wien pilot factory industry 4.0. 9th Conference on Learning Factories 2019, 31, 200–205.

032

Rentzos, L., Doukas, M., Mavrikios, D.,

Mourtzis, D., & Chryssolouris, G. (2014).

Integrating manufacturing education with industrial practice using teaching factory paradigm: A construction equipment application. Procedia CIRP, 17, 189–194.

Schmidbauer, C., Komenda, T., & Schlund, S.

(2020). Teaching cobots in learning factories–user and usability-driven implications. Procedia Manufacturing, 45, 398–404.

043

Spillane, D. R., Menold, J., & Parkinson, M. B.

(2020). Broadening participation in learning factories through industry 4.0.

074

Stief, P., Dantan, J., Etienne, A., & Siadat, A.

(2018). Influence of learning factories on students’ success–a case study. 6th CIRP Global Web Conference, 78, 155–160.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.08.3

(9)

Critical success factors in implementing teaching … 07

Stojkić, Ž., & Bošnjak, I. (2019). Development of learning factory at FSRE, University of Mostar. 9th Conference on Learning Factories 2019 (CLF 2019), 31, 180–186.

029

Sudhoff, M., Prinz, C., & Kuhlenkötter, B.

(2020). A systematic analysis of learning factories in Germany-Concepts,

production processes, didactics. Procedia Manufacturing, 45(2019), 114–120.

081

Syauqi, K., Munadi, S., & Triyono, M. B.

(2020). Students ’ perceptions toward vocational education on online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 9(4), 881–886.

https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20766 Tvenge, N., Martinsen, K., Sudha, S., & Keshav,

V. (2016). Combining learning factories and ICT-based situated learning. Procedia CIRP, 54, 101–106.

Wafroturrohmah, W., Syah, M. F. J., &

Suyatmini, S. (2020). Evaluation on teaching factory implementation: Studies in management, workshop, and learning-

pattern aspects. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(2), 203–215.

Wahjusaputri, S., Bunyamin, B., & Nastiti, T. I.

(2019). Penguatan pendidikan karakter model social problem solving bagi siswa sekolah dasar. JPPM (Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat), 6(2), 119–130.

https://doi.org/10.21831/jppm.v6i2.27371 Wahjusaputri, S., & Siregar, A. F. (2017).

Kewirausahaan (entreprenuership) berbasis manajemen strategik bagi wirausaha baru di Kecamatan Kebayoran Lama Utara, Jakarta Selatan. Proceeding of Community Development, 333–342.

https://doi.org/10.30874/comdev.2017.39 Wermann, J., Colombo, A. W., Pechmann, A.,

& Zarte, M. (2019). Using an

interdisciplinary demonstration platform for teaching industry 4.0. 9th Conference on Learning Factories 2019, 31, 302–308.

048

Yohana, C. (2020). Factors influencing the development of entrepreneurship competency in vocational high school students: A case study. International Journal of Education and Practice, 8(4), 804–819.

https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2020.

84.804.819